government, and the laws, to suffer what is called anarchy. This better account of our situation must be pleasing to your humanity, and therefore I give it you. But we differ a little in our sentiments respecting the loyalists (as they call themselves) and the conduct of America towards them, which you think "seems actuated by a spirit of revenge; and that it would have been more agreeable to policy, as well as justice, to have restored their estates upon their taking the oaths of allegiance to the new governments." That there should still be some resentment against them in the breasts of those who have had their houses, farms, and towns so lately destroyed, and relations scalped under the conduct of these royalists, is not wonderful; though I believe the opposition given by many to their re-establishing among us is owing to a firm persuasion, that there could be no reliance on their oaths; and that the effect of receiving those people again would be an introduction of that very anarchy and confusion they falsely reproach us with. Even the example you propose of the English commonwealth's restoring the estates of the royalists after their being subdued, seems rather to countenance and encourage our acting differently, as probably if the power, which always accompanies property, had not been restored to the royalists; if their estates had remained confiscated, and their persons had been banished, they could not have so much contributed to the restoration of kingly power, and the new government of the republic might have been more durable. The majority of examples in your history are on the other side of the question. All the estates in England and south of Scotland, and most of those possessed by the descendants of the English in Ireland, are held from ancient confiscations made of the estates of Caledonians and Britons, the original possessors in your island, or the native Irish, in the last century only. It is but a few months since that your parliament has, in a few instances, given up confiscations incurred by a rebellion suppressed forty years ago. The war against us was begun by a general act of parliament declaring all our estates confiscated, and probably one great motive to the loyalty of the royalists was the hope of sharing in these confiscations. They have played a deep game, staking their estates against ours; and they have been unsuccessful. But it is a surer game, since they had promises to rely on from your government of indemnification in case of loss; and I see your parliament is about to fulfil those promises. To this I have no objection, because though still our enemies, they are men; they are in necessity; and I think even an hired assassin has a right to his pay from his employer: it seems too more reasonable that the expense of paying these should fall upon the government who encouraged the mischief done, 'rather than upon us who suffered it; the confiscated estates making amends but for a very small part of that mischief: it is not therefore clear that our retaining them is chargeable with injustice. I have hinted above, that the name loyalists, was improperly assumed by these people. Royalists they may perhaps be called: but the true loyalists were the people of America against whom they acted. No people were ever known more truly loyal, and universally so, to their sovereigns: the protestant succession in the house of Hanover was their idol. Not a jacobite was to be found from one end of the colonies to the other. They were affectionate to the people of England, zealous and forward to assist in her wars, by voluntary contributions of men and money, even beyond their proportion. The king and parliament had fre quently acknowledged this by public messages, resolutions, and reimbursements. But they were equally fond of what they esteemed their rights, and if they resisted when those were attacked, it was a resistance in favor of a British constitution, which every Englishman might share in enjoying who should come to live among them: it was resisting arbitrary impositions that were contrary to common right and to their fundamental constitutions, and to constant ancient usage. It was indeed a resistance in favor of the liberties of England, which might have been endangered by success in the attempt against ours; and therefore a great man in your parliament' did not scruple to declare, he rejoiced that America had resisted! I, for the same reason, may add this very resistance to the other instances of their loyalty. I have already said, that I think it just you should reward those Americans who joined your troops in the war against their own country: but if ever honesty could be inconsistent B. FRANKLIN. with policy, it is so in this instance. To M. DUPONT DE NEMOURS, AT PARIS. SIR, trade, &c. Philadelphia, June 9, 1788. I have received your favor of December 31, with the extract of a letter which you wish to have translated and published here. But seven states having, before it arrived, ratified the new constitution, and others being daily expected to do the same, after the fullest discussion in convention, and in all the public papers, till every body was tired of the argument, it seemed too late to propose delay, and especially the delay that must be occasioned by a revision and correc The first Lord Chatham. 2 G VOL. I. tion of all the separate constitutions. For it would take at least a year to convince thirteen states that the constitutions they have practised ever since the revolution, without observing any imperfections in them so great as to be worth the trouble of amendment, are nevertheless so ill formed as to be unfit for continuation, or to be parts of a federal government. And when they should be so convinced, it would probably take some years more to make the connections. An eighth state has since acceded, and when a ninth is added, which is now daily expected, the constitution will be carried into execution. It is probable however that at the first meeting of the new congress, various amendments will be proposed and discussed, when I hope your Ouvrage sur les principes et le bien des républiques en général, &c. &c. may be ready to put into their hands; and such a work from your hand I am confident, though it may not be entirely followed, will afford useful hints, and produce advantages of importance. But we must not expect that a new government may be formed, as a game of chess may be played, by a skilful hand, without a fault. The players of our game are so many, their ideas so different, their prejudices so strong and so various, and their particular interests, independent of the general seeming, so opposite, that not a move can be made that is not contested; the numerous objections confound the understanding; the wisest must agree to some unreasonable things, that reasonable ones of more consequence may be obtained, and thus chance has its share in many of the determinations, so that the play is more like tric-trac with a box of dice. We are much pleased with the disposition of your government to favor our commerce, manifested in the late réglement. You appear to be possessed of a truth which few governments are possessed of, that A must take some of B's pro duce, otherwise B will not be able to pay for what he would take of A. But there is one thing wanting to facilitate and augment our intercourse. It is a dictionary, explaining the names of different articles of manufacture, in the two languages. When I was in Paris I received a large order for a great variety of goods, particularly of the kind called hardwares, i. e. wares of iron and steel: and when I showed the invoice to your manufacturers, they did not understand what kind of goods or instruments were meant by the names: nor could any English and French dictionary be found to explain them. So I sent to England for one of each sort, which might serve both as explanation and as a model; the latter being of importance likewise, since people are prejudiced in favor of forms they have been used to, though perhaps not the best. They cost me 25 guineas, but were lost by the way, and the peace coming on the scheme dropped. It would however, as I imagine, be well worth receiving. For our merchants say we still send to England for such goods as we want, because there they understand our orders, and can execute them precisely. With great and sincere esteem, I am, &c. B. FRANKLIN. TO THE PRINTER OF THE EVENING HERALD. Justification of the State of Massachusetts, against certain censures in the British papers. SIR, The British news-writers are very assiduous in their endeavors to blacken America. Should we not be careful not to afford them any assistance by censures of one another, especially by censures not well founded? I lately observed in one of your papers, the conduct of the state of Massachusetts reflected on as being inconsistent |